Thanks for reminding me I have church tonight!
Posted on 06/15/2006 6:41:00 AM PDT by edpc
Acclaimed British physicist Stephen Hawking has said that humanity is finally getting close to understanding the origin of the universe.
Speaking at a lecture in Hong Kong, Hawking said that despite some theoretical advances in the past years, there are still mysteries as to how the universe began.
"Despite having had some great successes, not everything is solved. We do not yet have good theoretical understanding of the observation of the expansion of the universe," he told an audience of 2,500 at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology Thursday.
"Without such understanding, we cannot be sure of the future of the universe.
"New observational results and theoretical advances are coming in rapidly; cosmology is a very exciting subject. We are getting close to answering these old questions: why are we here, where did we come from?"
The 64-year-old also said his unfulfilled ambitions, among many, were to find out what happens inside black holes, how the universe began and how the human race can survive in the next 100 years.
Above all, he joked, he wants to understand women.
On Tuesday Hawking said the human race should reach for the stars to survive as the Earth is at risk of being wiped out by a disaster.
He believes humans should settle in space, predicting a lunar settlement within 20 years and a Martian colony in 40.
Hawking, a Lucasian Professor of Mathematics at the University of Cambridge, speaks with a voice synthesiser and has been in a wheelchair since developing motor neurone disease.
During his Hong Kong visit he also revealed he is writing a children's book with his daughter about theoretical physics.
Hawking is the author of international best seller "A Brief History of Time", which attempted to explain a range of subjects in cosmology, including the Big Bang, black holes, light cones and superstring theory.
He is on a six-day visit to Hong Kong and will meet Chief Executive Donald Tsang Friday before heading to Beijing Saturday where he will give a lecture on string theory.
Thanks for reminding me I have church tonight!
You said -- "Just italicize it and it's implied."
My choice... end of story...
Regards,
Star Traveler
I guess that would include the owner of this site. Better a shrivelled crip than a bleeding Hemorrhoid with hs pants on upside down.
How are we going to know if it's him, W.O.P.R. from War Games, or a clock radio?
See how easy it is? Well....I guess you told me! I'll somehow try to recover from that stinging rebuke.
/sarcasm
Part of your tagline: Well I say there are some things we don't want to know!
Based on the original comment.....I concur!
;-)
Can I come? That's my kind of church!
The more the merrier!
The age limit seems to be about 25. After that the person may grow in wisdom and wonder about things, but the first accomplishments remain the most revolutionary. This may be due to the fresh perspective; a fresh perspective after 25 wouldn't be all that common.
Only if you get REALLY tipsy.
;-)
Ummm..I participate in a lot of those religion threads, so, no. Besides, most Bible-thumpers limit Bible-thumpery to those threads.
My, My!
You said -- "Not at all FRiend. Let's talk scripture on a science thread. Specifically, what does the Good Book say about self-righteousness?"
I would refer to Ann Coulter's book (and chapter...) on the "grieving widows" for a starter. And then I would say that no amount of talk about "self-righteousness" is going to silence me on talking about the Bible (and neither should it silence *anyone* else).
That kind of "self-righteous talk" is exactly the same type of "ploy" that Ann Coulter is talking about -- but in the political arena. She says it's specifially designed to "shut off talk" so that you cannot respond. That's precisely the nature of any questioning about "self-righteousness"
The fact of the matter is that the Bible says to proclaim it's Word -- high and low, throughout the entire world, in all places, in all situations, at any time. The Apostle Paul did it. The rest of the Apostles did it. We're to do it.
I don't even have to be concerned about it (any issue of self-righteousness) -- in the least -- because I'm not proclaiming the "righteousness of self" -- but rather -- the "righteousness of God and of Jesus Christ".
Perhaps some people legitimately miss this particular point. Perhaps some people think this is a proclamation of "self-righteousness". If so, then that's a perfect example of *how misled* they are on the "Gospel" and what it means. They -- then -- have *no concept* of what the Gospel of Jesus Christ is -- according to what the Bible tells us and what Jesus Christ has done for us.
And in *this particular case* -- of this thread -- it's *certainly* appropriate, in context with the origins of the universe. And it's certainly appropriate in the context of what the Bible says, in that "God has chosen the foolish things of the world to put to shame the wise." It fits *exactly* in with origins and with context (how smart and/or wise) the person is (along with our society).
It couln't be more appropriate if one tried to make it so.
So, sorry, I don't only invoke the Bible here, I also invoke "Ann Coulter".
Regards,
Star Traveler
I'm always a little tipsy.
Really now?
How about I sober you up?
No...I'm still at work...it's no fun being sober at work!
Oh my!
It appears that the two of you are trying to hijack this thread!
Good work.
And get a room.
It seems virtually certain that the ultimate mathematical laws of nature will turn out to have a beauty and depth of structure beyond anything seen so far. The "final theory," they suspect, is none other than the "superstring theory,"...or, as it is now called, "M-theory." The mathematical structure of this theory is so profound that after twenty years of intensive research by physicists and mathematicians, they feel that they have barely scratched the surface. Nevertheless, enough is known about the theory that experts marvel at it, using such words as miraculous to describe it. One of the greatest physicists of our time, in describing superstring theory to a layman, felt frustrated by his own inability to communicate the grandeur and magnificence of what his research had revealed to him: "I don't think I've succeeded in conveying to you," he said, "its wonder, incredible consistency, remarkable elegance, and beauty..."If the ultimate laws of nature are, as scientists can now begin to discern, of great subtlety and beauty, one must ask where this design comes from. Can science explain it? That is not possible. For if science always explains design by showing it to be part of a consequence of a deeper and greater design, then it has no way to explain the ultimate design of nature. One cannot go any farther in that direction. Thus, if at the end of that road one is confronted with a magnificent example of what we called "symmetric structure" in the ultimate laws themselves, then science really has no alternative to offer to the Argument from Design.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.